Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electrical System (HIPES)

Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electrical System (HIPES)

Peak Power, Spinning Reserve, and Frequency Control

Charles W. Forsberg

Oak Ridge National Laboratory*P.O. Box 2008; Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6165

Tel: (865) 574-6783; e-mail: [email protected]

Hydrogen Utility Group(DOE/EE Advisory Group)

Telecon: 1:30 pmMarch 7, 2007

*Managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. The submitted manuscript has been authored by a contractor of the U.S. Government under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. Accordingly, the U.S. Government retains a

nonexclusive, royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of this contribution, or allow others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes. File name: HIPES EERev

Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electrical System (HIPES)

A centralized system using hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity for

Peak Electricity ProductionSpinning ReserveFrequency Control

The Challenge of Electricity Production:

Matching Production with Demand

Electricity Demand Varies with Time of Day, Weekly, and Seasonally

03-180

Daily Weekly Yearly

Ene

rgy

Dem

and

The Price (and Cost) of Electricity at Times of Peak Demand is High

0102030405060708090

01/01/2005 01 07/01/2005 01 12/28/200

Ele

ctri

city

Pri

ce (¢

/kW

.h)

Average 5.81

Price Paid by Alberta Grid in 2005

Different Electricity Sources have Different Characteristics

HighLowFossil

LowHighRenewables

LowHighNuclear

Operating Cost

Capital Cost

Energy Source

“Base-Load” Operations are Required forLow-Cost Nuclear and Renewable Electricity

Large-Scale Renewable Electric Production may

not be Viable without Electricity Storage

• Large-scale electric renewables (>10% of electricity) require delivery of electricity when needed

• Problems exist on windless days or cloudy days at and night

• Backup power is expensive

Fossil Fuels are Used to Match Electricity Demand with Production

• Fossil fuels are inexpensive to store (coal piles, oil tanks, etc.)

• If fossil fuel consumption is limited, what are the alternatives that have the fossil-fuel electrical system characteristics?

• Systems to convert fossil fuels to electricity have relatively low capital costs

04-031

Limited Electricity Storage Options —

<1-day Capacity

• Hydro pump storage− Storage for hours (water

volume)− Example: TVA Raccoon

Mountain →• 1530 MW(e)

• Compressed air energy system (CAES)

• Flow batteries

Electricity Storage Requirements for a Non-Fossil Electrical System

• Store days or weeks of electricity demand− Address weekly and seasonal mismatches in

production with demand− Address multiday “no-wind” or “no-sun”

electricity-production shortfalls• Storage capability separate from

production• Storage and electricity production for

spinning reserve and frequency control

Current Markets for Grid Electricity Storage

7 to 10 years40 years20 yearsLifetime

Hours to days~2 weeksSecondsCapacity (Storage Time)

1 to 8 hours0.2 to 2 hoursSeconds Discharge Time at Rated Power

1 MW to 1 GW10 MW to 1 GWUp to 200 MWStorage System Power Level

80 GW (cost sensitive)70 to 100 GW30-40 GWTotal Market Potential (U.S.)

$300/kW (load leveling)$400–1,000/kW (peak shaving/load shifting)

$650/kW (renewables)

$300 to $1,000/kW$700/kWCapital Cost

Load Shifting and Load LevelingReserve Power: Grid Stability and Reliability

RegulationStorage

Technology Parameter

Applications for Power System Operators

There is Also a Power Quality Challenge: Frequency and Demand

15000

17500

20000

22500

25000

0:00 4:00 8:00 12:00 16:00 20:00 0:00

Syst

em L

oad

(MW

)

22200

22250

22300

22350

22400

8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00

Regulation

15000

17500

20000

22500

25000

0:00 4:00 8:00 12:00 16:00 20:00 0:00

Syst

em L

oad

(MW

)

22200

22250

22300

22350

22400

8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00

Regulation

ERCOT (Texas)

Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electric System (HIPES)

Matching Base-Load Nuclear and Base-Load Renewables with Electricity Demand

Requires Efficient, Low-Capital-Cost Methods to Convert H2 to Electricity

HIPES: Grid Electricity and Electrolysis

06-111

Fuel Cells, Steam Turbines, or

Other TechnologyH2 Production

Underground Hydrogen/Oxygen

(Optional)Storage

Relative Capital Cost/kW

Facility

$$$ $ $$

EnergyProduction Rate vs Time

Time

Variable

2H2O2H2 + O2

Electrolyzer Complex

Time

Weekend Weekday

HIPES: Nuclear Version(Other Centralized Systems Such as Solar Power Towers Have Similar Characteristics)

06-015


Other TechnologyH2 ProductionNuclear Reactor

2H2O

Heatand/or

Electricity

2H2 + O2Underground

Hydrogen/Oxygen (Optional)Storage

Relative Capital Cost/KW

Facility

$$$$ $$ $ $$


Time Time Time

Constant Constant Variable


Other TechnologyH2 ProductionNuclear Reactor

2H2O

Heatand/or

Electricity

2H2 + O2Underground

Hydrogen/Oxygen (Optional)Storage

Relative Capital Cost/KW

Facility

$$$$ $$ $ $$


Time Time Time

Constant Constant Variable

Hydrogen Production

05-082

Hydrogen Production Options

Norsk Atmospheric Electrolyser

• Near term− Electrolysis− Base-load or night-time

electricity• Longer term (nuclear

or solar)− High-temperature

electrolysis− Hybrid− Thermochemical

Hydrogen and Oxygen Bulk Storage

The Weekly and Seasonal Energy Storage Option

Hydrogen Storage as a Commercial Technology• Chevron Phillips H2 Clemens Terminal• 160 x 1,000 ft cylinder salt cavern• Same technology used for natural gas,

where one-third of a year’s supply is in storage in the fall

Underground Bulk H2 Storage Cost is 1/100 that of Other Technologies

(Same Technology Used for Natural Gas)

Shaft

Other rock strata

Impervious caprock

Porous rock air storage

Water

Constraints*Economics demands

high-volume H2 storage

Capital Cost: $0.80–$1.60/kg H2

Geology determines siting

Storage costs are low (<10%) compared with H2 costs

*Commercial in salt; not a commercial technology in other geologies

Oxygen Storage Minimizes HIPES Costs per kW(e), but it Creates Challenges

04-092

OxygenStorage

OxygenPlume

• Store O2 underground like H2• Oxygen hazard

− Ground-level plume− Major questions about long-distance transport by

pipeline

• Avoid hazard by heating O2 before storage (oxygen rises if it escapes)− Heat input from heat source or inefficiencies in the

H2 production process− Significant R&D required

• Other options

Electricity ProductionRequires Very Low Capital Cost Because Generating Equipment is Used for Only

Limited Periods of Time

HIPES Requires Low Capital Cost per kW(e) for the Hydrogen-to-Electricity Step

(Conversion Step Used a Limited Number of Hours per Year)

06-111


Other TechnologyH2 Production

Underground Hydrogen/Oxygen

(Optional)Storage

Relative Capital Cost/kW

Facility

$$$ $ $$


Time

Variable

2H2O2H2 + O2

Electrolyzer Complex

Time

Weekend Weekday

HIPES Steam Turbine for Electricity*(Low-Cost Conversion of H2 and O2 to Electricity)

06-016

• High-temperature steam cycle− H2+ O2 → Water

• Low cost− No boiler− High efficiency

(70%)

Steam

1500º C

Hydrogen

Water

PumpCondenser

Burner

SteamTurbine

InOut

CoolingWater

Generator

Oxygen

*20 MW(t) natural gas + O2 → Electricity(Demonstration under way by Clean Energy Systems)

Clean Energy Systems (CES) is Developing a Natural-Gas/Oxygen

Ultra-High-Temperature Steam System

Recycle Water

C.W.

Cond.

FuelProcessing

Plant

CrudeFuel

AirSeparation

PlantAir

N2

Coal, RefineryResidues, or

Biomass

NG, Oil orLandfill Gas

HP IP LP

O2

Fuel*

CO2Recovery

* CH4, CO, H2, etc.

ExcessWater

EOR, ECBM, orSequestration

DirectSales

HX

ElectGen.

Multi-stageTurbines

Gas Generator

CO2

RH

Recycle Water

C.W.

Cond.

FuelProcessing

Plant

CrudeFuel

FuelProcessing

Plant

CrudeFuel

AirSeparation

PlantAir

N2

AirSeparation

PlantAir

N2

AirSeparation

PlantAir

N2

Coal, RefineryResidues, or

Biomass

NG, Oil orLandfill Gas

HP IP LP

O2

Fuel*

CO2Recovery

CO2Recovery

* CH4, CO, H2, etc.

ExcessWater

EOR, ECBM, orSequestration

DirectSales

HX

ElectGen.

Multi-stageTurbines

Gas Generator

CO2

RH

Courtesy of Clean Energy Systems (CES)

CES Natural Gas-Oxygen Combustor

06-040

• Hydrogen-oxygen combustor similar to natural gas–oxygen combustor

• CES test unit− 20 MW(t)− Pressures from 2.07 to

10.34 MPa− Combustion chamber

temperature: 1760ºC− Turbine technology

limits performance

Courtesy of Clean Energy Systems (CES)

HIPES H2/O2 Steam Generation may Allow Very Fast Load Following

06-016

• Traditional power systems have slow response to variable electric demand− Steam plant limited by boiler

heat-up− Brayton turbines limited by

compressor speed-up and air-fuel combustion limits

• For HIPES, potential for extremely fast response− Frequency control− Spinning reserve

Steam

1500º C

Hydrogen

Water

Pump Condenser

Burner

SteamTurbine

InOut

CoolingWater

Generator

Oxygen

• New system• Feed: H2 and O2

• Major components (low capital cost)− Combustor− Steam turbine− Electric generator

• Efficiency: 70%

• Commercial (Natural-gas electric plant)

• Feed: H2 and air• Major components

− Combustor− Gas turbine− Steam boiler− Steam turbine− Electric generator

• Efficiency: 54%

Hydrogen to Electricity Optionswith Combustion Cycles

HIPES Combined Cycle

Longer-Term Option:HIPES Fuel Cell for Electricity

04-096

H2 O2

2H2 + 4OH–→4H2O + 4e–

Anode

O2 + 2H2O + 4e–

→ 4OH–

Cathode

e–

T = 80-100º C

Water RemovalHeat Rejection

H2O

KOHSolution

Gas Flow Channel

ElectrodeCatalyst Layer

Gas Flow Channel


Hydrogen Oxygen

Pump

OH–

H2 O2

2H2 + 4OH–→4H2O + 4e–

Anode

O2 + 2H2O + 4e–

→ 4OH–

Cathode

e–

T = 80-100º C

Water RemovalHeat Rejection

H2O

KOHSolution

Gas Flow Channel


Gas Flow Channel


Hydrogen Oxygen

Pump

OH–

Alkaline Fuel Cell

• Reduced fuel cell cost and higher efficiency by using O2 rather than air− Oxygen electrode limits

performance− Liquid electrolyte for active

cooling at high power densities− Potential for ~70% efficiency

• Example: NASA shuttle alkaline oxygen-hydrogen fuel cells

MarketsPeak Electricity

Spinning ReserveFrequency Control

Basis for HIPES Economics:Intermediate and Peak Power

• Low-cost H2 and O2− Night and weekend electricity for electrolysis− Nuclear steady-state production complexes

• Low-cost bulk storage of H2 and O2− Daily, weekly, and seasonal storage− Required for H2/O2 from low-cost off-peak electricity

• Low-capital-cost efficient H2/O2-to-electricity systems− Significantly lower capital cost than the competition: natural-gas

combined-cycle plants− Higher efficiency (may approach 70%)

• Sell electricity at times of peak demand− Electrolyzer option: Electricity sales price must be 2 to 3 times

electricity purchase price− Nuclear option: Steady-state H2 and O2 with electric sales at peak

power rates

Analysis of Economics Based on Marginal Prices of Electricity

• “Buy-low and sell-high” option depends upon the grid and local market

• Use real data: 2004 FERC reported costs of marginal electricity by hour

• Examine different markets− Identify markets where a large price spread exists in the

marginal cost of electricity versus time− Determine bases for price variation− Match HIPES characteristics to the market

• HIPES electrolysis option is competitive when the peak electricity sales price is 2 (optimistic) to 3 times (conservative) the buy price of electricity

• HIPES nuclear option is potentially more competitive but longer-term option

Seattle: Marginal Price of Electricityversus Hours per Year

(Low-Cost Renewable Hydro in the Spring)

07-013

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Hou

rs/y

ear

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95

FY2004 FERC Marginal Prices

Potential HIPES Customer with Seasonal Storage

Southern Marginal Price of Electricity versus Hours/Year

(Balanced Home/Commercial/Industrial Load)

07-013

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Hou

rs/y

ear

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95


Unlikely HIPES Customer: Too Few Hours with High-Price Electricity

Arizona Public Service Marginal Price of Electricity vs Hours/Year

(Base-Load Nuclear/Fossil and a Hot Summer)

07-013

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Hou

rs/y

ear

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95


Potential Daily and Seasonal HIPES Customer

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Marginal Electric Price vs Hours/Year(Massive Daily Swing: Low Demand for 5 Hours per Day)

07-013

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Hou

rs/y

ear

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95

FY2004 FERC Marginal Price

Potential Daily HIPES Customer

LADWP

07-013

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Hou

rs/y

ear

Hou

rs/y

ear

Dollars/MW(e)-h

Southern

AzPS

Seattle

Different Utilities have Different NeedsMarginal Electricity Price Versus Hours/Year

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

<5

5-10

10-1

5

15-2

0

20-2

5

25-3

0

30-3

5

35-4

0

40-4

5

45-5

0

50-5

5

55-6

0

60-6

5

65-7

0

70-7

5

75-8

0

80-8

5

85-9

0

90-9

5

>95


Los Angeles Department of Water and PowerArizona Public Service

SouthernSeattle

HIPES Steam Turbine for Spinning Reserve and Frequency Control

06-016

• If hot operating turbine, HIPES power output can be ramped up quickly− H2+ O2 → steam (tens of milliseconds)− No slow boiler response− Constant turbine speed and peak

temperature but higher pressures

• Two applications− Spinning reserve− Frequency control

• No existing electric system with such capability

• Economic case less well defined

Relevance of HIPES to the Larger Hydrogen Economy

HIPES is a H2 Niche Market that may Create the H2 Infrastructure

• The central deployment problem for the H2economy is the chicken-and-egg challenge− Private industry will not build H2 production systems

until the market exists− Many H2 users (vehicles, etc.) will not buy the

technology until H2 is widely available• HIPES is potentially a mega-H2 market with

integrated production/use facilities− Wide distribution to match electric market− Single utility customer and thus no chicken-egg

problem• Major implications of HIPES deployment for other

H2 users− Massive production and storage facilities− Commercialization of key H2 technologies− Facilities can sell H2 as a secondary product with large-

market economics of scale

R&D Needs

HIPES Technology Status and Needs(Blue: R&D Challenges Shared with Other Technologies; Red: R&D Challenges Unique to HIPES)

• Electrolysis is a commercial technology− Improving over time: Need for high-pressure electrolysis− Alternative hydrogen production technologies being developed

• Storage technologies− Hydrogen storage in salt is a commercial technology− Hydrogen storage in other geologies has not been demonstrated− Bulk oxygen storage: no experience

• Hydrogen-to-electricity technology− Fuel-oxygen steam turbine technology being developed

• CES development program for 12 years• Carbon dioxide sequestration needs pushing the technology• R&D on limits to rate of change of electricity production

− Fuel cell technology• Technology developed for special applications• Not fully developed for large-scale industrial applications

• Systems analysis (including economics): Limited work

Underground Oxygen Storage Studies(Critical Issues: Chemical Reactions with Geology and Safety)

• Four study components− Industrial experience in oxygen handling (industrial input on

safety strategies)− Evaluations of chemical reactivity of various geologies with O2− Alternative safety strategies− Assessment of cost implications

• Evaluations of potential for geological storage to consume or generate impurities in the O2

• Evaluations of chemical reactivity impacting the storage geology− Assess chemical reaction potential

• Many types of geologies are not fully oxidized• Potential for many types of chemical reactions

− Candidate geologies: Salt, granite, and sedimentary rocks• Alternative safety strategies

− Traditional strategies such as cutoff valves (industry)− Nontraditional strategies (preheat O2, etc.)

Hydrogen-to-Electricity Technologies(Critical Issues: Integration with other Programs Developing These Technologies)

• Cooperative studies with developers of key technologies− Oxygen fuel to steam− Fuel cells

• Identify and understand any differences between HIPES requirements and other users of the technologies− Example: Rate of change in electricity

production

Systems Studies(Critical Needs: Process Integration and Systems Economics)

• Cooperative studies with users on economics of intermediate and peak power systems, spinning reserve, and frequency control − Work with EPRI and utilities (ongoing discussions with

EPRI)− Use standard electrical load and price information models

to determine the worth of the technology− Develop cooperative studies with renewables community

• Cooperative studies with providers of key technologies and sponsors of the technologies− Fuel cells (GE, Cenergie, etc.)− Oxygen-fuel steam turbines (CES)

• Systems models− Process integration− Economic assessments

Conclusions• The mismatch between electricity generation and

demand is a a major grid operating challenge today and a major constraint for large-scale renewable electricity (solar or wind)

• Large scale production and storage of H2 and O2creates new options

• Potentially favorable economics in three markets:− Peak electricity production− Spinning reserve− Frequency control

• Significant R&D remains, with the need to integrate several developing technologies

Biography and References

Dr. Charles Forsberg is a Corporate Fellow at Oak Ridge National Laboratory; a fellow of the American Nuclear Society; and recipient of the 2005 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) Robert E. Wilson Award for outstanding chemical engineering contributions to nuclear energy, including his work in hydrogen production and nuclear renewable systems. He served as the 2005 AIChE chair for hydrogen programs, has been awarded 10 patents, and has published over 200 papers. Dr. Forsberg has written extensively on hydrogen futures. He received his bachelor's degree in chemical engineering from the University of Minnesota and his doctorate in nuclear engineering from MIT. After working for Bechtel Corporation, he joined the staff of Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

HIPES References

C. W. Forsberg, “Economic Implications of Peak vs Base-Load Electric Costs on Nuclear Hydrogen Systems,” American Institute of Chemical Engineers Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California, November 12–17, 2006.

C. W. Forsberg, Assessment of Nuclear-Hydrogen Synergies with Renewable Energy Systems and Coal Liquefaction Processes, ORNL/TM-2006/114, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, August 2006.

C. W. Forsberg, “Synergistic Benefits of a Nuclear-Renewables Hydrogen Economy,” Paper 2622, CD-ROM, 17th Annual U.S. Hydrogen Conference, Long Beach, California, March 12–16, 2006.

C. W. Forsberg, Nuclear Hydrogen for Peak Electric Production and Spinning Reserve, ORNL/TM-2004/194, January 2005.

Electricity demand varies daily, weekly, and seasonally. Today fossil fuels are used to match electricity production with demand. Fossil fuels excel in this role because (1) storage costs are low (coal piles, oil tanks, etc.) and (2) the capital cost of equipment to convert fossil fuels to electricity is low relative to that for fossil fuels. However, the traditional methods of using fossil fuels may be limited because of concerns about climate change. The electricity sources for a greenhouse-constrained world (nuclear, renewable, and fossil fuels with carbon dioxide sequestration) have similar characteristics: high capital costs and low operating costs. They must operate at full capacity to minimize the cost of electricity to the consumer; however, their output does not match customer electricity demand.

One technology (concept developed at ORNL) to match electricity production to electricity demand in a low-greenhouse-gas economy is the Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electric System (HIPES). Hydrogen and oxygen are produced from water using off-peak electricity or nuclear hydrogen or centralized solar hydrogen (power tower) systems. The two gases are stored in underground facilities (the same technology used for the seasonal storage of natural gas). Underground gas storage is 1-to-2 orders of magnitude less expensive than other gas storage systems and allows weekly and seasonal H2 and O2 storage to match electricity production with consumption. Central storage of H2 favors central production of H2 and O2 to avoid the costs of transporting these gases from distributed generation systems to central storage systems.

HIPES uses H2 and O2 to produce electricity to match production with consumption using technologies with the requirements of (1) low capital costs per kW(e) and (2) efficient conversion of H2 and O2 to electricity. Several technologies are being investigated. One example is an advanced steam turbine with a burner that combines H2, O2, and water to produce 1500ºC steam that serves as feed to a special high-temperature turbine with actively cooled blades. No expensive boiler is required. Efficiencies approach 70%. Because there is no boiler, the system can potentially have very fast response and also be used to provide spinning reserve and frequency control. The other option is the use of advanced fuel cells. If successfully developed, HIPES would enable large-scale use of electric renewables by solving the backup-electricity challenge with these electricity sources. It is also a niche market that may help create the infrastructure for a larger H2 economy.

Summary: Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electricity System

Fuel Cells are Being Developed

• Alkaline fuel cells are a potential replacements for gas turbines

• Cenergie is developing industrial stationary alkaline-fuel-cell systems

• GE is developing an alternative industrial stationary solid-oxide fuel cell/electrolyzer system

• Potential for combined electrolysis–fuel cell system− Fuel cell output >>

electrolysis capacity− Oxygen (rather than air)

reduces cost and boosts efficiency

Cenergie alkaline-fuel-cell stack

07-013

8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 TotalsHours

175 30 -12 --25 20 2 4 181 ->95

72 13 5 2 --11 6 -18 61 -90-95

103 22 15 6 --9 15 1 13 82 -85-90

145 32 17 16 --11 20 1 33 107 -80-85

176 45 3 30 15 -11 59 2 45 186 15 75-80

224 69 66 62 30 -21 77 15 86 285 30 70-75

275 86 165 200 25 -21 159 53 96 429 25 65-70

358 109 516 495 147 -25 399 186 88 651 147 60-65

449 163 1,089 1,139 309 -41 671 268 87 1,028 309 55-60

531 181 1,859 1,577 341 -67 1,166 358 83 1,314 341 50-55

691 273 1,506 1,018 508 -97 1,343 462 378 1,479 508 45-50

819 311 657 456 627 -175 1,641 588 1,826 1,256 627 40-45

1,093 438 386 398 981 -271 1,645 614 1,658 797 981 35-40

1,067 863 489 219 1,619 850 307 916 560 1,902 391 1,619 30-35

1,060 694 374 88 522 343 360 89 126 1,342 260 522 25-30

761 981 88 26 1,111 364 1,112 83 65 887 157 1,111 20-25

479 2,734 67 43 1,866 680 3,014 425 700 238 31 1,866 15-20

141 1,105 1,470 2,963 513 6,519 3,155 50 4,776 -11 513 10-15

59 229 9 34 170 28 32 ---9 170 5-10

106 406 3 ---19 -7 -69 -<5

PJM West

ComEdison LADWP

AEP-SPP SRP

Minn P&L

AEP+Dayton

Florida P&L

ArizonaPSSouthern

ISON. East Seattle $/MW(e)-h

Marginal Electric Price vs Hours/Year


07-013

Hours/year

8,784 8,784 8,784 8,784 Totals-2 4 ->95

5 -18 -90-95

15 1 13 -85-90

17 1 33 -80-85

3 2 45 15 75-80

66 15 86 30 70-75

165 53 96 25 65-70

516 186 88 147 60-65

1,089 268 87 309 55-60

1,859 358 83 341 50-55

1,506 462 378 508 45-50

657 588 1,826 627 40-45

386 614 1,658 981 35-40

489 560 1,902 1,619 30-35

374 126 1,342 522 25-30

88 65 887 1,111 20-25

67 700 238 1,866 15-20

1,470 4,776 -513 10-15

9 --170 5-10

3 7 --<5

LADWP AzPSSouthernSeattle $/MW(e)-h

Hours at Different Marginal Prices


Documents

Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electrical System (HIPES)